The recently dismissed mayor of Bogota, Gustavo Petro, was absolutely right when he stated that “a developed country is not a place where the poor have cars. It’s where the rich use public transportation.” I am pretty sure our neighbors in Hong Kong, having just been listed ‘best city in the world for commuters’, would beg to disagree: indeed developed countries can have it all—nice cars for those who can afford them and great public transportations for everybody—it just comes at a price.
If Hong Kong tops the list of the 84 cities assessed in the “The Future of Urban Mobility 2.0”, it still underachieves when it comes to the development of cycling paths and is clearly not faring well as far as air quality indicators are concerned. And yet, even in the first installation of the very same report produced by consulting firm Arthur D. Little in 2011, Hong Kong was already No. 1 and its success was seen as resulting from “a well-balanced split between different forms of transport that move people away from individualized motorized transport”—the Octopus card, owned at the time by 95% of citizens, was being deemed the cornerstone of a “well-articulated mobility strategy”.
In 2014 the wording has grown stronger: Hong Kong is now doted with “the most advanced urban mobility system in the world.” Among the key elements of that system: public transport represents 64% of the modal split; the number of vehicles registered per capita is among the lowest amongst the cities surveyed; and the average number of smart cards per citizen reaches 3.1! Residents often own two cards, whereas both cross-border commuters and tourists alike are strongly encouraged to get one. When it comes to “green” drawbacks, things have obviously deteriorated since 2011, apart from cycling paths: transport-related CO2 emissions have doubled in just three years! Hence the adoption of the resolute and ambitious “Clean Air Plan” in March 2013, clearly a pre-condition for cycling paths to be rolled out beyond the New Territories…
What about Macao?
In a previous column, I already stressed the inadequacy of the yearly assessment provided by the Transport Department (DSAT) regarding the setting in motion of the “General Policy on Traffic and Land Transportation in Macao (2010-2020)”—which, back in 2009, lucidly identified the main issues while making some far-reaching, although not mandatory, recommendations. To put it simply, the DSAT report can hardly hide that “too little” is done and “too slow”. Key statistics, like the share of public transport in the modal split, the penetration of smart cards or the cars per capita ratio are simply absent—despite some of these indicators being used in the 2009 consultation document.
The criteria delineated by the Arthur D. Little survey could therefore be of interest: all together, it is some 19 factors divided between “maturity” and “performance” elements that allow for a fruitful comparative perspective. On the “maturity” side, only 2 out of 12 criteria seem to bode well in favor of Macao: the low public transportation fare and the frequency of the busiest transportation lines. But road density is about 7 times more than in Hong Kong and the number of cars per capita at least 2 times more, even if we exclude the 2-wheelers. On the side of “performance”, hardly any criteria seem to have improved based on measurements available in Macao: air indicators are deteriorating; traffic-related fatalities are worsening; the evolution of the share of public transport or zero-emissions means in the modal split are marginally positive; and the mean travel time to work has clearly gotten worse.
While waiting for the LRT to be completed, swift and resolute action seems needed. Even though the “how(s)” would require undoubtedly more than a column to explore, redesigning bus routes and operations might prove useful, while making a better integrated usage of the Macau Pass could help—all parking meters in Hong Kong have been Octopus friendly since 2004. But first things first: let’s improve the assessment criteria!
Published in Macau Daily Times on April 18 2014
